DND is not a good universal game system. It’s pretty good at being DND, but that’s a particular beast that’s mostly about resource management.
You can definitely use it for a game about social intrigue, or horror, or modern day anything, but it’s not really good at any of that. Like using a hammer to put screws in, you’ll probably get something done, and if you’re hanging with your friends you’ll probably have a good time. But it’s a weird tool to reach for.
Personally, I don’t think the core of the rules system is very good at all. Flat probability feels weird. Armor as all-or-nothing is weird. Hit and damage being split into two rolls is slow and weird. In the latest edition, making very few choices about your character often feels bad. Levels are a very coarse unit of growth. The magic system somehow manages to make magic not feel like magic- no wonder, no mystery, it’s just safe and standardized. I could go on.
But it’s mega popular and people are emotionally invested, so there’s not much to be done about it. There are dozens of people playing the thousands of other games out there.
Also a lot of people have never played anything else, so their analysis and defense of it is often lacking. Like if I’ve only ever played baseball, and never even watched any other sports, I wouldn’t feel qualified to talk about bowling. But you get people saying like “no you need to wear cleats that’s a universal property of sports” when bowling comes up. Like, not every game has six stats. Not every game has attributes like that at all.
And again, if you’re having fun with dnd then that’s the primary goal achieved. We don’t need to maximize fun and efficiency in all things all times. I just think that it would be a good experience to branch out more, even if it’s scary, because that will lead to a richer experience overall.
I love d&d because I grew up with it, but absolutely agree with you. I think that with new players, involving them in the world for roleplay is the most critical part, and character creation with Fate is the best I’ve seen for someone to pick up and use in 10 minutes.
I love Fate and think it’s much more intuitive. DND tends to crush player creativity with a lot of “sorry that’s just flavor”, and guides players towards “just move and attack”.
I generally agree. For one shots, there are much slimmer systems out there.
I’m not sure I agree about splitting hit and damage feeling weird, but it definitely is slow. But overall, yeah. DnD is generally one of my least favorite systems to play in.
I’m not sure I agree about splitting hit and damage feeling weird,
It feels weird to me when you roll a really big number to hit their AC, and then roll the minimum for damage. Or the other way, where you just barely roll their AC and then roll max damage. There are narrative ways you could justify it, but I don’t see why you would want to. It’s not adding anything worth having to the experience, imo. The game doesn’t care if you beat the check by 0 or 20. It’s just an extra step and the information is discarded.
I think pf2e fixes this.
Forgot in my original: DND 5e barely has a concept of degree of success
I completely agree with that sentiment. I think the d20 itself is flawed in that it provides linear probability. I’m more a fan of 3d6 for the bell curve it provides.
When it comes to the damage, I can agree that a degree of success should play into it. I do like how white wolf systems carried the success level over into the damage roll.
DND is not a good universal game system. It’s pretty good at being DND, but that’s a particular beast that’s mostly about resource management.
You can definitely use it for a game about social intrigue, or horror, or modern day anything, but it’s not really good at any of that. Like using a hammer to put screws in, you’ll probably get something done, and if you’re hanging with your friends you’ll probably have a good time. But it’s a weird tool to reach for.
Personally, I don’t think the core of the rules system is very good at all. Flat probability feels weird. Armor as all-or-nothing is weird. Hit and damage being split into two rolls is slow and weird. In the latest edition, making very few choices about your character often feels bad. Levels are a very coarse unit of growth. The magic system somehow manages to make magic not feel like magic- no wonder, no mystery, it’s just safe and standardized. I could go on.
But it’s mega popular and people are emotionally invested, so there’s not much to be done about it. There are dozens of people playing the thousands of other games out there.
Also a lot of people have never played anything else, so their analysis and defense of it is often lacking. Like if I’ve only ever played baseball, and never even watched any other sports, I wouldn’t feel qualified to talk about bowling. But you get people saying like “no you need to wear cleats that’s a universal property of sports” when bowling comes up. Like, not every game has six stats. Not every game has attributes like that at all.
And again, if you’re having fun with dnd then that’s the primary goal achieved. We don’t need to maximize fun and efficiency in all things all times. I just think that it would be a good experience to branch out more, even if it’s scary, because that will lead to a richer experience overall.
I love d&d because I grew up with it, but absolutely agree with you. I think that with new players, involving them in the world for roleplay is the most critical part, and character creation with Fate is the best I’ve seen for someone to pick up and use in 10 minutes.
I love Fate and think it’s much more intuitive. DND tends to crush player creativity with a lot of “sorry that’s just flavor”, and guides players towards “just move and attack”.
The resource management is what made bg3 boring to play (and that’s my hill to die on).
100%
Also, it is much less fun with really experienced players that genuinely focus on min-maxing.
Also also, the rules could be much clearer and concise. 3 (expensive) books for a brand new party of noobs is a needless barrier.
I generally agree. For one shots, there are much slimmer systems out there.
I’m not sure I agree about splitting hit and damage feeling weird, but it definitely is slow. But overall, yeah. DnD is generally one of my least favorite systems to play in.
Clearly in the game system the quality of the hit impacts damage…just only in 5% of cases. Is a little odd.
It feels weird to me when you roll a really big number to hit their AC, and then roll the minimum for damage. Or the other way, where you just barely roll their AC and then roll max damage. There are narrative ways you could justify it, but I don’t see why you would want to. It’s not adding anything worth having to the experience, imo. The game doesn’t care if you beat the check by 0 or 20. It’s just an extra step and the information is discarded.
I think pf2e fixes this.
Forgot in my original: DND 5e barely has a concept of degree of success
I completely agree with that sentiment. I think the d20 itself is flawed in that it provides linear probability. I’m more a fan of 3d6 for the bell curve it provides.
When it comes to the damage, I can agree that a degree of success should play into it. I do like how white wolf systems carried the success level over into the damage roll.